Women’s decision-making roles in vegetable production, marketing and income utilization in Nepal’s hills communities

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 100298
Author(s):  
Ramesh Balayar ◽  
Robert Mazur
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Joshi ◽  
D Kalauni

Agriculture is the primary occupation for the majority of Nepalese populace for their livelihood; the case is especially true for rural areas of Nepal. While both male and female engage in diverse agricultural activities, gender-specific roles in agricultural decision-making are significant. A survey study was conducted in three wards of Kanchanpur district (Majhgau-14, Bhuda-02, and Baghphata-19) to examine the gender-specific labor input in vegetable production activities. Eighty households were chosen by random sampling and a scheduled interview was carried out. Most of the activities such as fence construction, transplanting, fertilizer use, harvesting, cleaning, and grading were found typically female's responsibility. However, males were found dominantly involved in land preparation. Also, males were found to have relatively more access to, and control over farm resources and played dominant role in decision making than women. The findings of this study revealed that there are gender-specific domains in rural farming system. Therefore, there is a need to develop gender friendly technology and policy while formulating specific project planning and development efforts. SAARC J. Agri., 16(2): 109-118 (2018)


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 3521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Md. Wakilur Rahman ◽  
Md. Salauddin Palash ◽  
Hasneen Jahan ◽  
Shokhrukh-Mirzo Jalilov ◽  
Mohammed Mainuddin

This paper verifies the statement that “women contribute greatly to growing crops year-round, but their work is not recognized” through in-depth empirical investigation of their participation in rice and vegetable production and farm decision-making processes in Northwest Bangladesh. Interviews were held with 240 randomly selected couples (husband and wife interviewed separately) to document their views of the female’s participation in crop farming activities and farm and household decision-making. The findings reveal that women play a substantial role in farming and are increasingly involved in farm management, but they are generally overlooked or under-valued by their male counterparts. Looking at crop-specific participation, among 18 different activities of the rice production cycle, men recognized that their spouse had “high” participation in three activities, “strong” in one, “moderate” in five, and “weak” in nine. A similar result was found for activities in vegetable production. In both cases, men’s recognition differed from that reported by their spouses. Logistic regression modeling against eleven variables (selected from the intersectionality and patriarchy literature) revealed six statistically significant variables that influence men to consult with their wives regarding farm decisions. The dominant variables were spouse education (years of schooling), spouse Non-governmental organization (NGO) membership, and the number of hours per day that the spouse spent working on the farm. The article provides a new insight into family dynamics in household and farm decision-making processes. The collection and analysis of both counterparts’ (husband and wife) views provides empirical evidence that not only is women’s participation in agricultural activities and decision-making under-recognized, but that higher education and being involved in NGO activities have a positive influence on male perceptions of women’s contributions. While these findings may not be universally applicable, the framework (using intersectionality and patriarchy indicators together with logistic regression modeling) is highly adaptable. Application in other parts of Bangladesh would reveal perceptions in those regions, and would support a more comprehensive approach to future policy intervention towards gender integration into crop farming in line with promoting women’s education and NGO participation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie F. Reyna ◽  
David A. Broniatowski

Abstract Gilead et al. offer a thoughtful and much-needed treatment of abstraction. However, it fails to build on an extensive literature on abstraction, representational diversity, neurocognition, and psychopathology that provides important constraints and alternative evidence-based conceptions. We draw on conceptions in software engineering, socio-technical systems engineering, and a neurocognitive theory with abstract representations of gist at its core, fuzzy-trace theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document